
| |  | |  | |
| Molecular Circuits, Biological Switches, and Nonlinear Dose-Response Relationships Melvin E. Andersen, Raymond S.H. Yang, C. Tenley French, Laura S.
Chubb, and James E. Dennison Quantitative and Computational Toxicology Group, Center for Environmental
Toxicology and Technology, Foothills Campus, Colorado State University,
Fort Collins, Colorado, USA. Abstract Signaling motifs (nuclear transcriptional receptors, kinase/phosphatase cascades, G-coupled protein receptors, etc.) have composite dose-response behaviors in relation to concentrations of protein receptors and endogenous signaling molecules. "Molecular circuits" include the biological components and their interactions that comprise the workings of these signaling motifs. Many of these molecular circuits have nonlinear dose-response behaviors for endogenous ligands and for exogenous toxicants, acting as switches with "all-or-none" responses over a narrow range of concentration. In turn, these biological switches regulate large-scale cellular processes, e.g., commitment to cell division, cell differentiation, and phenotypic alterations. Biologically based dose-response (BBDR) models accounting for these biological switches would improve risk assessment for many nonlinear processes in toxicology. These BBDR models must account for normal control of the signaling motifs and for perturbations by toxic compounds. We describe several of these biological switches, current tools available for constructing BBDR models of these processes, and the potential value of these models in risk assessment. Key words: biological switches, dose-response relationships, endocrine-active compounds, estrogen, molecular circuitry, pharmacodynamic models, risk assessment, TCDD. Environ Health Perspect 110(suppl 6) :971-978 (2002) . http://ehpnet1.niehs.nih.gov/docs/2002/suppl-6/971-978andersen/abstract.html |
|
|
 |
This article is part of the monograph Application
of Technology to Chemical Mixture Research.
Address correspondence to M.E. Andersen, CIIT-Centers
for Health Research, PO Box 12137,
6 Davis Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 USA. Telephone: (919)
558-1205. Fax: (919) 558-1404. E-mail: mandersen@ciit.org
American Chemistry Council Project RSK0005 provided
support for our work on switching in hepatocytes. National Institute
of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) Superfund Basic Research Program
project grant P42 ES05949, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
cooperative agreement U61/ATU 881475, and NIEHS Quantitative Toxicology
training grant T32 ES07321 provided support for other aspects of the
project.
Received 13 April 2002; accepted 2 October 2002.
Risk assessment approaches increasingly use two complementary concepts--mode
of action and tissue dose--to organize available toxicological and epidemiological
studies, to decide on the shape of the dose-response curve (linear, nonlinear,
or threshold), and to conduct low-dose, interspecies, dose route, and interindividual
extrapolations (Andersen and Dennison 2001). Mode of action provides a basis
to decide qualitatively on the shape of the dose-response curve (U.S. EPA
1999). By knowing the nature of tissue dose, i.e., whether it is parent chemical,
metabolite, receptor-bound toxicant, etc., physiologically based pharmacokinetic
(PBPK) models can be used to calculate tissue dose metrics for various dose
routes, species, and dose levels to support extrapolations (Clewell and Andersen
1985). These two organizing principles, mode of action and tissue dosimetry,
have the potential to encourage application of a wide array of mechanistic data
and biologically based modeling in chemical risk assessment. However, for nonlinear
and threshold responses, acceptable exposure limits are still primarily derived
by a procedure based on objective evaluation of dose-response curves, followed
by application of multiple uncertainty factors that adjust for interspecies
differences in response, for interindividual response differences in humans,
for adequacy of available data, and to adjust to lifetime exposure periods.
Many of these uncertainty factors are used because of ignorance about the shape
of dose-response curves at low incidence levels for these responses.
A variety of toxicants interfere with cellular signaling by endogenous endocrine
system hormones and biological receptors (Kavlock and Ankley 1996). Our understanding
of these signaling pathways, at least qualitatively, has increased markedly
in recent years through new techniques in molecular biology, including studies
using knockout and transgenic animals and the development of high throughput
methods in genomics, transcriptomics, and proteomics. Some major signaling motifs
that are of interest for toxic responses include actions of nuclear receptors,
such as members of the steroid hormone family receptors (Landers and Spelsberg
1992), and G-protein-coupled cell-surface receptors, such as those proteins
that recognize peptide-stimulating hormones secreted by the anterior hypothalamus
(Clement et al. 2001). A possible impediment to the quantitative application
of these data in risk assessment is the sheer volume of the information being
collected at different levels of biological detail, i.e., the molecular, cellular,
organ system, organism, and population levels. How will we order and make sense
of all this information to provide a more complete understanding of dose-response
curves for endogenous signaling components and for exogenous compounds that
interfere with these signaling motifs?
Noble recently emphasized the complementary roles of observation and computational
modeling in studying the physiological function of biological systems. He writes:
The amount of biological data generated over the past decade by new technologies
has completely overwhelmed our ability to understand it . . . Indeed, it is
hard to see how [the] unraveling of complex physiological processes can occur
without the iterative interaction between experiment and simulation . . . In
a few years' time we shall all wonder how we ever managed to do without [computational
models]. . . . (Noble 2002).
These same comments apply to the generation of information on mode of action
in chemical risk assessment. Studies on mode of action are essentially qualitative
in nature and must be organized by quantitative computational models to make
predictions of the shape of the dose-response curves and to suggest important
new experimentation. In risk assessment these computational models are referred
to as biologically based dose-response (BBDR) models and provide the substrate
for simulations that link mode of action research with predicted physiological
consequences of exposures (Setzer et al. 2001). Here we discuss risk assessment
approaches for nonlinear toxicological processes that take into account dose-response
behaviors of native signaling molecules required for normal function, perturbations
of these systems by the presence of toxicants, and BBDR modeling of the underlying
molecular circuitry associated with normal and impaired function of these signaling
motifs.
Perturbations of Signaling Pathways
Molecular Circuitry
Gene and protein arrays, simultaneously assaying the expression of hundreds
or thousands of genes and proteins, provide information on expression of suites
of genes and batteries of protein products that are coordinately regulated and
the manner in which toxicants alter their expression. However, the data from
these arrays must be integrated to provide an understanding of biological function
rather than serving simply as a catalog of change. Lander and Weinberg have
expressed their opinion regarding the overall goal of genomics:
The long-term goal is to use this information to reconstruct the complex molecular
circuitry that operates within the cell to map out the network of interacting
proteins that determines the underlying logic of various cellular biological
functions including cell proliferation, responses to physiologic stresses, and
acquisition and maintenance of tissue-specific differentiation functions. A
longer term goal, whose feasibility remains unclear, is to create mathematical
models of these biological circuits and thereby predict these various types
of cell biological behavior. (Lander and Weinberg 2000)
The underlying concept here is that biological functions require the successful
operation of specific circuits that coordinate information flow and govern cellular
behavior under a variety of physiological conditions. Analogous to electric
circuits, molecular circuits consist of components (proteins, RNAs, signaling
molecules, etc., and cellular targets) that organize flows of cellular information,
although there is arguably more variability in the biological than in the electrical
system. Toxicants, especially those that interfere with hormones and signaling
motifs, can interfere with normal functioning of these molecular circuits, leading
to altered function and ultimately to toxicity.
Biological Switches
Molecular circuits are controlled by energy provided in the form of receptors
and ligands that activate signaling motifs, leading to downstream biological
consequences. Most responses to these signaling compounds are themselves nonlinear.
The process by which some endogenous ligands or toxicant compounds cause nonlinear
responses is referred to here as "switching." Switches activate fundamental
changes in functional behaviors of cells in an all-or-none fashion. The more
nonlinear the response is, the more switchlike it is. Switches are another functional
component of circuits. Signaling motifs with linear dose-response behavior
would be expected to show graded responses to changes in signal concentration.
However, very few examples of graded transcriptional response have been reported
for eukaryotic gene expression (Louis and Becskei 2002). The carefully timed
development of organisms from a single fertilized cell requires coordination
of a series of cellular switches to complete the transformation from a single
fertilized cell to a mature organism (Davidson et al. 2002).
Several nonlinear switching processes have been examined quantitatively. Progesterone
induces maturation of Xenopus oocytes. The dose response for maturation
of individual oocytes was described with a Hill equation for the activation
of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) (Ferrell and Machleder 1998):
[1]
where C is concentration of progesterone and Kdn
is the concentration at half-maximal response. In the Hill equation the exponent
n (Hill coefficient) determines the steepness of the dose-response
curve. In simpler molecular systems such as dimerization of estrogen receptors,
an n value of 2.0 for a functional response such as gene expression may
simply indicate involvement of a bimolecular process. With oxygen binding to
hemoglobin, n values of 3-4 indicate that binding of the first oxygen
molecule to the hemoglobin tetramer leads to structural changes, facilitating
binding to the remaining three sites (allosteric binding). With Xenopus oocyte
maturation, Hill coefficients for individual oocytes were reported to be between
20 and 30 (Ferrell and Machleder 1998). These high values indicate an all-or-none
switch for maturation in any individual oocyte. For populations of oocytes the
progesterone concentrations causing maturation were distributed fairly broadly.
Evaluation of populations of oocytes did not show the all-or-none responses
noted in individual cells. In the oocyte, progesterone receptor and MAPK cascade-signaling
motifs combine to control a switch that initiates maturation circuitry.
Receptor upregulation may also produce nonlinear biological responses. Certain
bacteria change phenotypic characteristics under conditions that encourage bacterial
growth. As bacterial concentrations increase, secondary metabolites are released
into the surrounding media. As the concentration of this signaling molecule
increases, the metabolite, in concert with a cytosolic receptor, initiates transcription
of a set of genes leading to new phenotypic characteristics in the bacteria.
Photobacterium fischreii regulates genes that control phosphorescence
via this mechanism (Fuqua et al. 1994). The suites of genes controlled by the
secondary metabolite-receptor interaction include the receptor protein
itself and an enzyme that converts the secondary metabolite to a higher-affinity
ligand. Thus, these metabolites indirectly serve as surrogates for the concentration
of bacteria. Because of the relationship to bacterial number, these responses
are called "quorum sensing." The metabolite accumulation signals the bacteria
that they are present in sufficient quantity to change phenotypic characteristics.
Many bacteria, including film formation in some species (Costerton et al. 1995;
Davies et al. 1998), use quorum-sensing motifs to respond to environmental stimuli.
Efforts to model these biological processes are also under way (Koerber et al.
2002).
Estrogen receptor upregulation controls vitellogenesis in some fish, leading
to nonlinear dose-response relationships and stable differentiation of
hepatocytes treated with high doses of estrogenic compounds (Shapiro et al.
1989). The possible role of receptor upregulation in these nonlinear responses
was investigated by simulation with a pharmacodynamic gene induction model.
Several generic gene induction models were developed and exercised (Andersen
and Barton 1999). These models recapitulated nonlinear behaviors with very high
Hill coefficients. More recently a transcriptional switch controlling methylation
of nucleosomes and transcriptional cofactors was described (Xu et al. 2001)
that was associated with coactivator-associated arginine methyltransferase-1
(CARM-1). This molecule acts as a coactivator for nuclear hormone signaling
via histone methylation and as a co-repressor of cyclic-AMP-associated
signaling pathways. This switch involves limiting concentrations of the CARM-1
coactivator and acts via histone modification to increase access to specific
genes and promoter regions. Activation of transcription by the nuclear receptors,
in concert with CARM-1, is expected to activate groups of genes and to silence
others.
The proper function of all these signaling pathways requires correct concentrations
of a variety of endogenous proteins and signaling molecules. To a very large
extent, dose response, a concept used frequently in toxicology in regard to
adverse responses, now has an equally important position in normal biology.
The ideas expressed in this regard are proper gene dosages in cells, leading
to proper concentrations of receptors and ligands for normal function. The proper
functioning of molecular circuits and maintenance of healthy conditions in the
organism requires appropriate doses of various signaling components and their
presence at appropriate times for activation of biological switches.
Endocrine-Active Compounds
Many endocrine-active compounds (EACs) interact with the normal cell circuitry
to mimic or antagonize the actions and functions of normal signaling systems.
Excess of EACs or deficiencies of natural hormones alter hormonal system function,
leading to impaired health. Impaired health covers a wide range of responses,
including loss of viability, impaired performance, altered reproductive success,
and delayed maturation. The actions of many signaling elements--cell-surface
receptors, cytosolic transcriptional factors, kinase/phosphatase cascades--are
now more completely understood than just a few years ago. Studies of the toxic
responses to EACs need to begin with examination of normal function of these
signaling motifs and how the normal function becomes perturbed by exogenous
compounds (Figure 1). The first requirement in a BBDR model, then, is to develop
an adequate representation for the dose-response control of normal function.
Secondarily, the focus is on the perturbation of normal function by exogenous
compounds. This reorientation to a perturbation approach to normal biology rather
than an emphasis on final pathology provides new avenues and strategies to evaluate
dose-response relationships in biology and in toxicology. These EACs serve
as examples through the remainder of this article.
 |
| Figure 1. Dose-response models
for perturbations of signaling motifs focus on normal biology including
dose-response behavior for endogenous signaling molecules and cognate receptors.
The actions of EACs would appear as perturbations on the normal, nonlinear
control of molecular circuitry and the switching modules moving between
and among various circuits. |
BBDR Models for Molecular Circuits and Switches
Concerted Cellular Responses
Most dose-response assessment models in toxicology assume smooth, continuous
changes in response to dose. These models describe many chemical processes by
statistical methods with average behaviors of molecules, as the numbers of particles
involved in most reactions and interactions are very large. The real world of
cells demonstrates a more complex variety of interacting circuitry. At the cellular
level, behaviors are more likely to be nonlinear and stochastic. A cell either
divides or it does not divide. In moving from one phenotypic state to another,
all the components have to change in concert to achieve a smooth pleiotropic
alteration in cell characteristics. A challenge in formulating the mathematical
models of cellular functions is the requirement to grasp the manner in which
continuous changes of chemical variables (i.e., ligand and receptor concentrations)
lead to stochastic responses such as apoptosis, proliferation, differentiation,
or activation of global cellular circuitry by exposure to chemicals.
Stochastic, nonlinear models of cellular-level responses may provide the basis
for developing tools that will simulate nonlinear dose-response behaviors
toward toxic exposures. Some stochastic models assess cancer risks based on
rates of cell division, cell death, and cell mutation. The Moolgavkar-Venzon-Knudson
(MVK) model (Figure 2) represents a stochastic model of carcinogenesis (Moolgavkar
and Knudson 1981). These cancer models have to be initially set to describe
tumor incidence in the control animals. These background rates are then altered,
i.e., perturbed by the actions of toxicant compounds. In developing BBDR models
it is necessary to evaluate the effect of dose on intrinsic biological parameters
of the model. The effects can be described empirically, as has usually been
done, or mechanistically. For the cancer models the stochastic aspect involves
some probability of division, death, or mutation that occurs randomly. Mechanistically,
the requirement is to understand (model) the relationship of these probabilities
with dose and to describe the manner in which dose changes the probability of
division, death, or mutation during a time interval. The relationships between
dose and cell proliferation or between dose and cell apoptosis are unlikely
to be simple continuous functions. The control of biological circuitry and the
transition between different states of the cellular circuitry in response to
exogenous signaling molecules should determine the dose-response manifestations
for proliferation, apoptosis, and mutation in many of these cancer models.
 |
Figure 2. The MVK model for
cancer, including cell division, cell death, and probabilities of mutation
during replication. Although the model itself is stochastic, the biological
processes represented by birth and death may themselves represent toxicant
actions on nonlinear signaling motifs associated with perturbation of cellular
circuits by the presence of toxicants. N represents the population
of normal cells, I the initiated cells, and M the mutated
cells. The parameter represents
the cell birth rate, ß the cell death rate, and µ the transformation rate,
where subscript 1 refers to the normal population and 2 refers to the initiated
population. |
Receptor-Mediated Control of Gene Products
Many EACs directly or indirectly interfere with gene expression. In discussing
molecular circuits the changes are generally coordinate alterations in groups
of genes that lead to altered biological characteristics of the affected cells.
It is often possible to measure responses of single genes with great precision
using modern techniques such as polymerase chain reaction amplification of gene
transcripts. Molecular markers, such as induction of cytochrome P4501A1 (CYP1A1)
message by 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) (Vanden Heuvel
et al. 1994), allows observation of the dose-response curves in lower dose
ranges than possible when examining overt adverse responses of the organism.
However, these measurements lead to questions about the linkage between these
precursor effects and clearly adverse responses of the organism. For instance,
should the observation of a 1% increase in CYP1A1 mRNA after 2,3,7,8-TCDD treatment
be considered adverse? This focus on a single gene may not be the correct one
for assessing toxicity. Dioxin and similar receptor-mediated EACs do not simply
control expression of a single gene in the intact liver. They alter concentrations
of a battery of gene products to induce a concerted, pleiotropic response in
hepatocytes (Bock 1993).
An Example with Tumor Promotion
Dioxin is a liver carcinogen in rats and a tumor promoter (Kociba et al. 1978;
Pitot et al. 1987). Many liver tumor promoters act by transiently increasing
proliferation of hepatocytes with longer-term adaptation to the exposures. The
adaptation, with phenobarbital, involves elaboration of transforming growth
factor-ß, a specific growth factor that constrains hepatocyte proliferation
(Jirtle et al. 1991). Cells resistant to cytoinhibition are presumed to derive
a growth advantage and grow out to preneoplastic foci under the selection pressure
from the promoter. The dose-response relationship for carcinogenesis requires
characterization of the dose of promoter required to increase the proliferation
of hepatocytes.
Phenobarbital, in common with a large number of liver tumor promoters, has
a receptor-mediated mode of action. These promoters interact with protein receptors
that serve as transcriptional modulators to alter expression of batteries of
genes in the hepatocytes. Phenobarbital interacts via the constitutive androstane
receptor (Waxman 1999). Other liver tumor promoters act via the aryl hydrocarbon
receptor (AhR) (Wilson and Safe 1998), the peroxisome proliferation-activating
receptor (Weghorst et al. 1994), or the pregnane-X receptor (Waxman 1999). All
these receptors, in concert with the toxic compounds, act to increase expression
of batteries of genes, leading to several alterations in expression of many
individual gene products, including specific genes. The effects on cell-level
characteristics are likely to be associated with these pleiotropic responses.
Among these promoters, 2,3,7,8-TCDD has received a great deal of attention
in the past decade as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has reevaluated
the risks of exposure to this environmental contaminant (U.S. EPA 2000). PBPK
and protein induction models describe dioxin kinetics in the body, including
binding to the AhR with activation of specific gene products (Kohn et al. 1993;
Leung et al. 1990). These models have also described the induction of specific
genes through interactions of the AhR-TCDD complex with DNA-response elements
for the AhR and various partnering molecules (Andersen et al. 1997b. Like most
mathematical models of biological systems, the BBDR models presently available
for dioxin represent a significant simplification of the individual molecular
processes. Simplifications are necessary to attain a computationally tractable
model and may be useful to gain insights about dose-response behavior (Suk
and Yang 2002). Bailey has emphasized the value and necessity of using simplifications
in modeling complex, biological systems (Bailey 2001). However, it is important
that the simplifications retain the important biological aspects of the responses.
The regulation of gene expression by dioxin and dioxinlike polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) and the AhR has been investigated in a variety of systems,
including many cell constructs with the CYP1A1 promoter upstream of particular
marker genes (Garrison et al. 2000; Jeon and Esser 2000). Such constructs allow
evaluation of the components necessary to control gene expression by the AhR
in a system with an available promoter. However, in the intact animal, the silencing
or activation of genomic structures that are not present in the cell constructs
may alter gene expression. We are studying AhR-mediated induction of CYP1A1
in primary hepatocytes. Induction does not follow coherent dose-response
relationships expected for a Hill relationship with a low n value. This
behavior is true both in vivo (Chubb et al. 2002) and in vitro
in the primary hepatocytes (French et al. 2002), as shown in Figures 3 and 4,
respectively.

|
| Figure 3. Induction of CYP1A1 and 1A2 by PCB 126
(3,4,5-3´,4´-pentachlorobiphenyl) in rat liver and the influence of a second
promoter. (A) The pattern of immunohistochemical staining for CYP1A1 protein
is consistent with a switch that induces a change from a normal phenotype
to an AhR-responding phenotype over a narrow range of dose. In the context
of the topic of this article, this AhR-agonist PCB has altered the molecular
circuitry of these hepatocytes, leading to activation of a cellular switch.
(B) In the presence of high daily doses of PCB 153, a phenobarbital-like
enzyme inducer that increases concentrations of a different cytochrome (CYP2B1/2),
PCB 126 no longer induces cells in the centrilobular region of the liver.
The presence of high PCB 153 (10,000 µg/kg) has turned off the AhR switch
(Chubb et al. 2002). |
With AhR agonists, the response of cells in the liver and of cells in vitro
does not appear to follow a continuous response pattern where a 50% induction
in the total liver is reflected by a 50% induction in all hepatocytes. The induction
of individual cells appears to occur almost in an all-or-none fashion. Cells
are either induced or remain in a basal state (Andersen et al. 1997a; Tritscher
et al. 1992). This response, a concerted response of a cell to the receptor-ligand
complex, is not yet well understood. The molecular circuitry that causes this
switchlike behavior leads to a qualitative alteration in response over a narrow
range of dose, moving the cell from one state to a new one. In the liver different
acinar regions have varying sensitivity for induction. At low doses centrilobular
cells are induced. As dose increases, more of the cells in the liver become
induced and the region of induced cells progresses toward the periportal area
of the liver acinus (Figure 3). Andersen et al. modeled regional enzyme induction
using a semiempirical induction model (Andersen et al. 1997a) that could represent
the differential induction throughout the liver (Figure 5). This regional induction
model coupled a PBPK model for the disposition of dioxin in the body, a geometric
representation of the liver acinus, and a more empiricalal description of enzyme
induction. Enzyme induction in each zone of the liver acini was modeled with
a Hill-type equation, with variable affinities for AhR-ligand-DNA
interactions in each acinar region. Successful modeling of induction in a five-compartment
liver acinus required that binding affinities differ by a factor of three between
adjacent acinar regions, with high Hill coefficients for induction (i.e., 4-5)
in each region of the acinus. The next step will be to provide a more mechanistic
description of the molecular circuit and switching that comprises this all-or-none
behavior.
 |
| Figure 4. CYP1A1 staining
in vitro. Immunohistochemical staining for CYP1A1 in rat primary
hepatocytes treated with various concentrations of PCB 126 for 24 hr. The
staining occurs in increasing numbers of cells with increasing dose rather
than increasing concentrations of protein in each cell proportional to dose
(French et al. 2002). |
 |
| Figure 5. The predicted staining
pattern for dioxin induction of CYP1A1 in rat liver at various doses of
dioxin. A PBPK model was linked to a nonlinear, semiempirical model of gene
induction to examine the degree of nonlinearity indicated by the regional
induction data with various daily doses of dioxin, as observed by Tritscher
et al. (1992). The regional Hill coefficient for protein induction required
to provide demarcation between adjacent regions of the liver, 4-5, indicated
a switch controlling different phenotypic behaviors of the hepatocytes.
Reproduced from Andersen et al. (1997a) with permission from Academic Press.
|
These switching responses of hepatocytes appear to represent a reversible differentiation
to a new stable state (a new phenotype) of the hepatocyte. This differentiation
includes the concerted induction of a battery of genes. Interestingly, the current
induction models (Andersen et al. 1997b; Kohn et al. 1993), if extended to describe
multiple genes with independent promoters, would give rise to competitive, not
cooperative, interactions. Biological mechanisms that might explain nonlinear,
concerted responses of gene batteries include receptor autoregulation, genomic
level switches, such as that noted for histone methylation, or kinase cascades.
We are now developing an experimental system to study responses of isolated
hepatocytes to dioxinlike compounds (French et al. 2002). This experimental
system is intended to permit evaluation of the mechanistic characteristics of
the hepatocyte switch, including the role of kinase cascades or histone modification,
in these processes. The accumulation of more mechanistic data on induction is
necessary to provide sufficient biological detail to predict low-dose behavior.
Discussion
Modeling Tools for Describing Biological Switches
Chaos and attractors. Our continuing evaluation of induction
responses of hepatocytes has led us to a set of new concepts for future exposure
dose-response assessments. They include biological switching, molecular
circuits, and multiple stable states of the cells, in addition to our old concerns
regarding the relationship of molecular-level responses and the ultimate expression
of toxicity. How will we model these responses to predict responses over a wide
range of dose based on biological characteristics of cellular switches? Chaos
and complexity theorists have discussed concepts of stable attractors in complex
systems. In the context of molecular biology, an attractor is the proteomic
state of the cell (including the antecedent genomic state) that is stable because
of its ability to maintain homeostasis within a range of conditions. The attractor
concept implies that there are a finite number of stable states that exist rather
than a smooth transition between infinite numbers of cell phenotypes. In particular,
these concepts suggest that mammalian cells may exist in a suite of differentiated
forms that represent stable attractors for the overall behavior of the genetic
content of the cell (Kaufman 1995). Shapiro and colleagues (1989) and Simon
et al. (1988) have pursued limited modeling of stable states for hormone responsiveness
of cells for estrogen-responsive actions. The basal or induced states in hepatocytes
caused by tumor promoters may represent two stable attractors. The increasing
concentration of the receptor-ligand complex may alter the concentration
of a limited set of initial gene products that move the circuitry from that
for one stable attractor to a second stable attractor. Over time, the overall
content and behavior change, consistent with the new stable state. The new state
determines the pathological or physiological consequences of induction for the
cell, whereas the dose response of the process is more likely determined by
some of the early interactions of the ligand and the receptor molecules in the
most sensitive population of cells. Tyson et al. (2001) have used similar cellular
paradigms to describe the cell cycle.
Early (transient) and late (persistent) responses to signaling molecules.
Switches are likely to be organized by positive feedback circuits to drive transitions
from one state to another. In normal maintenance of cell function in a given
state, homeostatic responses are more generally associated with negative feedback,
as with the feedback processes for endocrine target-organ function and release
of stimulating hormones from the pituitary. One concept involved in steroid
hormone function (Landers and Spelsberg 1992) and in memory storage was the
involvement of early and late responses organized by transcriptional receptor
or nervous system activation of cells (Kandel 2001). Here, early responses are
more transient; however, if these signals persist or are of sufficient magnitude,
they initiate more permanent alterations of genetic expression of gene batteries
and alterations of cell characteristics.
Some possible experimental and computational models. Among a
wider range of possibilities, it is apparent that nonlinear switching modules
exist for receptor autoregulation (Shapiro, et al. 1989), kinase/phosphatase
cascades (Ferrell and Machleder 1998), and Ca2+-mediated nerve-cell
signaling related to long-term potentiation (Bhalla and Iyengar 1999). Although
the nonlinear characteristics of these switches are evident, none have been
examined in sufficient detail to provide a quantitative understanding of the
molecular basis of the switch and its influence on the dose-response curve
at low incidence levels. Bhalla and co-workers have modeled various cascade
interactions that may be involved in long-term potentiation in neurons and maintaining
memory. Their work included biologically realistic kinetic models of these processes
that capture the emergence of altered cellular characteristics arising from
particular pulse trains at the cell surface (Bhalla and Iyengar 1999). Their
model structures and other efforts to create virtual cells should aid in providing
the biological detail for realistic BBDR models for various signaling motifs.
Glycoprotein-stimulating hormonessuch as thyroid-stimulating hormone, follicle-stimulating
hormone (FSH), and luteinizing hormone are released by the pituitary and have
end-organ effects on endocrine tissues. These hormones cause cellular responses
by binding to cell-surface G-protein-coupled receptors. Binding leads to
activation of adenylate cyclase (AC), with production of cyclic adenosine monophosphate
(cAMP). Phthalate esters interfere with FSH-mediated signaling in Sertoli cells
(Heindel and Chapin 1989), although the exact sites of interaction remain uncertain.
The responses of various endocrine tissues to these hormones depend on cAMP
and on a variety of other signaling molecules in the cell (Richards 2001), including
inducible kinases and guanosine triphosphatases. The efforts to unravel these
signaling pathways should lead to a representation of the key functional elements
involved in G-protein-coupled signaling in these cells and an improved
understanding of the role of these cascades in toxicity, disease, and health.
Generic tools. New methods for modeling the control of gene
batteries in normal systems may use Boolean networks (Kaufman 1995) or apply
neural network models (Vohradsky 2001) for expression of multiple gene families.
Quantum computational or predictive structural activity relationship approaches,
such as the reaction network modeling approach being developed in our laboratory
(Liao et al. 2002), should facilitate the simulation of molecular circuits and
cellular switches. The contributions from groups developing more quantitative
tools to assess physiological coordination of multiple cellular activities,
e.g., the Physiome Project (Physiome 2002), may significantly expand the mathematical
dose-response modeling approaches used by toxicologists and risk assessors
for integrating the exposure-response-dose paradigm into a perturbation
paradigm assessing toxic potential of compounds. Programming tools for modeling
neuronal function (Genesis 2002; Wilson et al. 1989) or the entire cell (Tomita
et al. 1999) are also available for evaluating integrated signaling motifs.
Although there are many candidate tools for developing models of genetic circuitry,
the immediate future in this area will require trial and error to discern the
mathematic/simulation tools that will allow the most rapid progress. A brief
synopsis of some of the major signaling motifs and several available tools for
analysis of biological circuits is listed in Table 1.
Systems theory. Increasingly, integrative biological research
relies on systems theory for connecting biological experiments with computational
descriptions of cellular structure and dynamics. Systems theory, i.e., the study
of systems that are conceptualized using networks to define information flows,
uses engineering concepts such as robustness, fragility, and failure cascades
(Csete and Doyle 2002) and serves as an organizational scaffold to support complex
system modeling. Current interest in systems biology is partly an outgrowth
of the need to conceptualize, hypothesize, modularize, design experiments, communicate
ideas, and share results between research institutions. It is also partly a
result of the need to integrate new computational methods, to construct and
interface complex models from different sources and disciplines, and to integrate
diverse information from genomics, proteomics, and metabonomics into coherent
models readily shared among different research groups. Bifurcation theory (Tyson
et al. 2001) may serve as a computational aid to identify attractors, even though
the parameter space for the individual components of the biological system becomes
very large. This approach examines the effects of parameter variation on solutions
of the nonlinear circuit model.
Rapid progress applying systems biology is apparent in a number of research
fields, including immune function (Germain 2001), the cardiac system (Noble
2002), developmental biology (Davidson et al. 2002), and prokaryotic systems
(Kitano 2002; Weng et al. 1999). Eventually, BBDR models for alterations in
signaling motifs and nonlinear toxicological responses may be linked to organ
system descriptions of physiology to predict both early responses (i.e., activation
or deactivation of biological switches regulating signaling motifs) and adverse
responses (i.e., diminished physiological function or diminished adaptability
to stress). Such models would fulfill the goals proposed by Noble of having
tools to simulate expected results, aid in experimental design, and predict
biological/toxicological consequences throughout the full range of exposure
situations with environmental toxicants (Noble 2002). |
|
 |
| [References Listed in PubMed] References
ACSL. 2002. Advanced Continuous Simulation Language. Huntsville,
AL:AEgis Technologies Group, Inc. Available: http://www.aegistg.com/
[accessed 20 Sept 2002].
AFCS. 2002. Alliance for Cellular Signaling. Dallas, TX:Alliance
for Cellular Signaling. Available: http://www.afcs.org
[accessed 20 Sept 2002].
Andersen ME, Barton HA. 1999. Biological regulation of receptor-hormone
complex concentrations in relation to dose-response assessments for endocrine-active
compounds. Toxicol Sci 48:38-50.
Andersen ME, Birnbaum LS, Barton HA, Eklund CR. 1997a. Regional
hepatic CYP1A1 and CYP1A2 induction with 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
evaluated with a multicompartment geometric model of hepatic zonation. Toxicol
Appl Pharmacol 144:145-155.
Andersen ME, Dennison JE. 2001. Mode of action and tissue dosimetry
in current and future risk assessments. Sci Total Environ 274:3-14.
Andersen ME, Eklund CR, Mills JJ, Barton HA, Birnbaum LS. 1997b.
A multicompartment geometric model of the liver in relation to regional induction
of cytochrome P450s. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 144:135-144.
Bailey JE. 2001. Complex biology with no parameters. Nature
Biotechnol 19:503-504.
Bhalla US, Iyengar R. 1999. Emergent properties of networks
of biological signaling pathways. Science 283:381-387.
Biospice. 2002. Biospice. Berkeley, CA:University of California.
Available: http://genomics.lbl.gov/index.html
[accessed 20 Sept 2002].
Bock KW. 1993. Aryl hydrocarbon or dioxin receptor: biologic
and toxic responses. Rev Physiol Biochem Pharmacol 125:1-42.
Chubb LS, Benjamin SA, Painter JT, Dean CE, Andersen ME. 2002.
Regional induction of CYP1A1 protein during treatment of rats with mixtures
of PCB126 and PCB153 [Abstract]. Toxicologist 66:93.
Clement F, Monniaux D, Stark J, Hardy K, Thalabard JC, Franks
S, et al. 2001. Mathematical model of FSH-induced cAMP production in ovarian
follicles. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 281:E35-E53.
Clewell HJ, 3rd, Andersen ME. 1985. Risk assessment extrapolations
and physiological modeling. Toxicol Ind Health 1:111-131.
Conolly RB, Kimbell JS. 1994. Computer simulation of cell growth
governed by stochastic processes: application to clonal growth cancer models.
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 124:284-295.
Costerton JW, Lewandowski Z, Caldwell DE, Korber DR, Lappin-Scott
HM. 1995. Microbial biofilms. Annu Rev Microbiol 49:711-745.
Csete ME, Doyle JC. 2002. Reverse engineering of biological
complexity. Science 295:1664-1669.
Davidson EH, Rast JP, Oliveri P, Ransick A, Calestani C, Yuh
CH, et al. 2002. A Genomic regulatory network for development. Science 295:1669-1678.
Davies DG, Parsek MR, Pearson JP, Iglewski BH, Costerton JW,
Greenberg EP. 1998. The involvement of cell-to-cell signals in the development
of a bacterial biofilm. Science 280:295-298.
Ferrell JE Jr, Machleder EM. 1998. The biochemical basis of
an all-or-none cell fate switch in Xenopus oocytes. Science 280:895-898.
French CT, Chubb LS, Billings R, Andersen ME. 2002. Developing
an in vitro model system to evaluate switch-like behaviors of hepatocytes
in response to various enzyme inducers [Abstract]. Toxicologist 66:89.
Fuqua WC, Winans SC, Greenberg EP. 1994. Quorum sensing in
bacteria: the LuxR-LuxI family of cell density- responsive transcriptional regulators.
J Bacteriol 176:269-275.
Garrison PM, Rogers JM, Brackney WR, Denison MS. 2000. Effects
of histone deacetylase inhibitors on the Ah receptor gene promoter. Arch Biochem
Biophys 374:161-171.
Genesis. 2002. General Neural Simulation System. Pasadena,
CA:California Institute of Technology. Available: http://www.genesis-sim.org/GENESIS/
[accessed 20 Sept 2002].
Germain RN. 2001. The art of the probable: system control in
the adaptive immune system. Science 293:240-245.
Heindel JJ, Chapin RE. 1989. Inhibition of FSH-stimulated cAMP
accumulation by mono(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate in primary rat Sertoli cell cultures.
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 97:377-385.
Jeon MS, Esser C. 2000. The murine IL-2 promoter contains distal
regulatory elements responsive to the Ah receptor, a member of the evolutionarily
conserved bHLH-PAS transcription factor family. J Immunol 165:6975-6983.
Jirtle RL, Meyer SA, Brockenbrough JS. 1991. Liver tumor promoter
phenobarbital: a biphasic modulator of hepatocyte proliferation. Prog Clin Biol
Res 369:209-216.
Kandel ER. 2001. The molecular biology of memory storage: a
dialogue between genes and synapses. Science 294:1030-1038.
Kaufman S. 1995. At Home in the Universe. New York:Oxford University
Press.
Kavlock RJ, Ankley GT. 1996. A perspective on the risk assessment
process for endocrine-disruptive effects on wildlife and human health. Risk
Anal 16:731-739.
Kitano H. 2002. Systems biology: a brief overview. Science
295:1662-1664.
Kociba RJ, Keyes DG, Beyer JE, Carreon RM, Wade CE, Dittenber
DA, et al. 1978. Results of a two-year chronic toxicity and oncogenicity study
of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin in rats. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol
46:279-303.
Koerber AJ, King JR, Ward JP, Williams P, Croft JM, Sockett
RE. 2002. A mathematical model of partial-thickness burn-wound infection by
Pseudomonas aeruginosa: quorum sensing and the build-up to invasion.
Bull Math Biol 64:239-259.
Kohn KW. 1999. Molecular interaction map of the mammalian cell
cycle control and DNA repair systems. Mol Biol Cell 10:2703-2734.
Kohn MC, Lucier GW, Clark GC, Sewall C, Tritscher AM, Portier
CJ. 1993. A mechanistic model of effects of dioxin on gene expression in the
rat liver. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 120:138-154.
Lander ES, Weinberg RA. 2000. Genomics: journey to the center
of biology. Science 287:1777-1782.
Landers JP, Spelsberg TC. 1992. New concepts in steroid hormone
action: transcription factors, proto-oncogenes, and the cascade model for steroid
regulation of gene expression. Crit Rev Eukaryot Gene Expr 2:19-63.
Leung HW, Paustenbach DJ, Murray FJ, Andersen ME. 1990. A physiological
pharmacokinetic description of the tissue distribution and enzyme-inducing properties
of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin in the rat. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol
103:399-410.
Liao KH, Dobrev ID, Dennison JE Jr, Andersen ME, Reisfeld B,
Reardon KF, et al. 2002. Application of biologically based computer modeling
to simple or complex mixtures. Environ Health Perspect 110(suppl 6):957-963.
Louis M, Becskei A. 2002. Binary and Graded Responses in Gene
Networks. Washington, DC:Science's Signal Transduction Signal Network. Available:
http://www.stke.org/cgi/content/full/sigtrans;2002/143/pe33
[accessed 20 Sept 2002].
Macey RI, Oster GF. 2002. Berkeley Madonna. Berkeley, CA:University
of California. Available: http://www.berkeleymadonna.com/
[accessed 20 Sept 2002].
MathWorks. 2002. MatLab. Natick, MA:The Mathworks, Inc. Available:
http://www.mathworks.com/ [accessed
20 Sept 2002].
Moolgavkar SH, Knudson AG Jr. 1981. Mutation and cancer: a
model for human carcinogenesis. J Natl Cancer Inst 66:1037-1052.
Noble D. 2002. Modeling the heart--from genes to cells to the
whole organ. Science 295:1678-1682.
Physiome. 2002. The Physiome Project. Seattle, WA:University
of Washington. Available: www.physiome.org [accessed 20 Sept 2002].
Pitot HC, Goldsworthy TL, Moran S, Kennan W, Glauert HP, Maronpot
RR, et al. 1987. A method to quantitate the relative initiating and promoting
potencies of hepatocarcinogenic agents in their dose-response relationships
to altered hepatic foci. Carcinogenesis 8:1491-1499.
Richards JS. 2001. New signaling pathways for hormones and
cyclic adenosine 3´,5´-monophosphate action in endocrine cells. Mol
Endocrinol 15:209-218.
Schuchard M, Landers JP, Sandhu NP, Spelsberg TC. 1993. Steroid
hormone regulation of nuclear proto-oncogenes. Endocr Rev 14:659-669.
SCoP. 2002. Simulation Control Program. Redlands, CA:Simulation
Resources, Inc. Available: http://www.simresinc.com
[accessed 20 Sept 2002].
Setzer RW, Lau C, Mole ML, Copeland MF, Rogers JM, Kavlock
RJ. 2001. Toward a biologically based dose-response model for developmental
toxicity of 5-fluorouracil in the rat: a mathematical construct. Toxicol Sci
59:49-58.
Shapiro DJ, Barton MC, McKearin DM, Chang TC, Lew D, Blume
J, et al. 1989. Estrogen regulation of gene transcription and mRNA stability.
Recent Prog Horm Res 45:29-58.
Simon Z, Vlad A, Michalas GI. 1988. Positive gene control and
steroid hormone receptor protein interactions. Mathematical model. Studia Biophysica
125:137-142.
Suk WA, Olden, K, Yang RSH. 2002. Chemical mixtures research:
future perspectives. Environ Health Perspect 110(suppl 6):891-892.
Systems Biology Workbench Development Group. 2002. Systems
Biology Markup Language. Pasadena, CA:Caltech Erato Kitano Systems Biology Workbench
Development Group. Available: www.cds.caltech.
edu/erato/ [accessed 20 Sept 2002].
Tata J, Baker B, Machuca I, Rabelo E, Yamauchi K. 1993. Autoinduction
of nuclear receptor genes and its significance. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 46:105-119.
Tomita M, Hashimoto K, Takahashi K, Shimizu TS, Matsuzaki Y,
Miyoshi F, et al. 1999. E-CELL: software environment for whole-cell simulation.
Bioinformatics 15:72-84.
Tritscher AM, Goldstein JA, Portier CJ, McCoy Z, Clark GC,
Lucier GW. 1992. Dose-response relationships for chronic exposure to 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
in a rat tumor promotion model: quantification and immunolocalization of CYP1A1
and CYP1A2 in the liver. Cancer Res 52:3436-3442.
Tyson JJ, Chen K, Novak B. 2001. Network dynamics and cell
physiology. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2:908-916.
U.S. EPA. 1999. Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment.
NCEA-F-0644. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
------. 2000. Integrated Summary and Risk Characterization
for 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin (TCDD) and Related Compounds.
Part II: Health Assessment for 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
and Related Compounds. Chapter 8. Dose-response Modeling for 2,3,7,8-TCDD. SAB
Review Draft. Report NCEA-I-0835. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
Vanden Heuvel JP, Clark GC, Kohn MC, Tritscher AM, Greenlee
WF, Lucier GW, et al. 1994. Dioxin-responsive genes: examination of dose-response
relationships using quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction.
Cancer Res 54:62-68.
Vohradsky J. 2001. Neural network model of gene expression.
FASEB J 15:846-854.
Waxman DJ. 1999. P450 gene induction by structurally diverse
xenochemicals: central role of nuclear receptors CAR, PXR, and PPAR. Arch Biochem
Biophys 369:11-23.
Weghorst CM, Devor DE, Henneman JR, Ward JM. 1994. Promotion
of hepatocellular foci and adenomas by di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate and phenobarbital
in C3H/HeNCr mice following exposure to N-nitrosodiethylamine at 15 days
of age. Exp Toxicol Pathol 45:423-431.
Weng G, Bhalla US, Iyengar R. 1999. Complexity in biological
signaling systems. Science 284:92-96.
Wilson CL, Safe S. 1998. Mechanisms of ligand-induced aryl
hydrocarbon receptor-mediated biochemical and toxic responses. Toxicol Pathol
26:657-671.
Wilson MA, Bhalla US, Uhley JD, Bower JM. 1989. GENESIS: a
system for simulating neural networks. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing
Systems (Touretzky D, ed). San Mateo, CA:Morgan Kaufmann, 485-492.
Xu W, Chen H, Du K, Asahara H, Tini M, Emerson BM, et al. 2001.
A transcriptional switch mediated by cofactor methylation. Science 294:2507-2511.
Last Updated: January 17, 2002 |
|
 |
|
| |